Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-09-2013, 07:18 PM
 
Location: OKIE-Ville
5,546 posts, read 9,508,162 times
Reputation: 3309

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nevergoingback View Post
Yeah I'm sure that's it. As a Sooner fan I have always wondered why OU doesn't have the Big12 logo on their field. I think every other team does. I don't mind and it doesn't bother me. I've always wondered.
I've also always wondered why the Big XII logo isn't on Owen Field......chin in the air perhaps?

I mean, they've won the conference 8x so there is something to their elite stature in the history of the Big XII, but not having the logo on the field (at least in the endzones or something) of the Big XII's most decorated team makes the solidarity of Big XII look pretty weak.

All Big XII teams should have the logo on their jerseys and their respective fields. If the teams don't do this then I think it is one more element which shows the weak solidarity of the Big XII as a whole.

And while the divisions are not there anymore, I'd be for something to commemorate the most exciting division in college football for much of the 2000's = the Big XII South. Even though we just lost A&M, it's just not the same. Miss those days.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-30-2013, 10:22 PM
 
4,077 posts, read 5,608,852 times
Reputation: 2046
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bass&Catfish2008 View Post
I've also always wondered why the Big XII logo isn't on Owen Field......chin in the air perhaps?

I mean, they've won the conference 8x so there is something to their elite stature in the history of the Big XII, but not having the logo on the field (at least in the endzones or something) of the Big XII's most decorated team makes the solidarity of Big XII look pretty weak.

All Big XII teams should have the logo on their jerseys and their respective fields. If the teams don't do this then I think it is one more element which shows the weak solidarity of the Big XII as a whole.

And while the divisions are not there anymore, I'd be for something to commemorate the most exciting division in college football for much of the 2000's = the Big XII South. Even though we just lost A&M, it's just not the same. Miss those days.
It will be on Owen Field tomorrow. I have no idea why. This ones a head scratcher.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2013, 01:59 PM
 
Location: OKIE-Ville
5,546 posts, read 9,508,162 times
Reputation: 3309
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevergoingback View Post
It will be on Owen Field tomorrow. I have no idea why. This ones a head scratcher.
The logo looked good. I thought it was fitting that the Oklahoma insignia was right over the top of the Big XII logo since we've dominated the conference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2013, 02:09 PM
 
Location: OKIE-Ville
5,546 posts, read 9,508,162 times
Reputation: 3309
Default 2013 Big XII Weekly Grades...

Week#1 Grades*
Oklahoma State (A-) (anytime you beat the so-called "lofty" SEC that gets you extra brownie points)
Oklahoma (B+), the Sooners shut out a very good QB and decent offense
Texas Tech (B+)
Texas (B)
Baylor (B), ridiculously outmatched opponent, Wofford?....seriously?
TCU (C+) (great effort, and did so without their best defensive player...what was Patterson thinking?)
West Virginia (D+)
Kansas St. (D-)
Iowa State (F)

*the teams awarded with a B+/B did not receive a superior grade because each of these teams were supposed to beat their opponents quite handily
*if the northern teams continue to perform this way....I'm calling for a revamping of the conference and just kicking them out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2013, 04:41 PM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
12,950 posts, read 13,346,261 times
Reputation: 14010
Texas a "B"?

Really? I'd rate that performance a D.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2013, 06:25 PM
 
Location: Austin, Texas
3,092 posts, read 4,971,739 times
Reputation: 3186
I wasn't happy with our first half performance, but I'd say Texas deserves a B+ at least. We did set a school record last night with 715 yards of total offense, after all. Now, I know NMSU sucks. But every team we play in week 1 sucks. I'm not making plans to wear a golden hat or anything, but I'm cautiously satisfied with last night's performance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2013, 06:36 PM
 
Location: OKIE-Ville
5,546 posts, read 9,508,162 times
Reputation: 3309
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoPro View Post
Texas a "B"?

Really? I'd rate that performance a D.
I could have easily rated them a C because of the extreme slow start....D seems a little low because it still was a win.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2013, 06:41 PM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
12,950 posts, read 13,346,261 times
Reputation: 14010
Texas almost always runs up big numbers against cupcakes, then for the RRS we take the length without any lube from Stoops & Co.

Maybe Ole Miss will be a better test, and I wouldn't count BYU out either.

That first 28 minutes last night was the most pathetic effort I've witnessed maybe since Kansas last season.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2013, 06:44 PM
 
Location: Austin, Texas
3,092 posts, read 4,971,739 times
Reputation: 3186
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoPro View Post
Texas almost always runs up big numbers against cupcakes, then for the RRS we take the length without any lube from Stoops & Co.

Maybe Ole Miss will be a better test, and I wouldn't count BYU out either.

That first 28 minutes last night was the most pathetic effort I've witnessed maybe since Kansas last season.
Not so much in recent years we haven't. As silly as it seems, that win against NMSU last night is probably better than any game against a cupcake we've had since 2009. Yes, it's sad that it's come to that, but fact is that for a good while we couldn't even beat up cupcakes.

Keep in mind that our offense actually wasn't terrible in the first half. We drove effortlessly down he field multiple times. Our problem was that we would make a stupid turnover or drop a big pass to end the drive.

Once again, I'm definitely not saying we're back. But we were pretty good once we got started. Keep in mind that last night was our offense's first game in a completely new system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2013, 07:05 PM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,867,563 times
Reputation: 18304
Texas defense played very well and I saw a lot of depth especially in running backs. Some of those younger players should a lot of speed and promise that I saw.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:46 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top